Image courtesy of [Michael Newman via Flickr]
News
Will News Outlets Have to Pay to Show the Walter Scott Shooting Video?
On April 4, Feidin Santana started recording as an unarmed black male, now identified as Walter Scott, attempted to get away from a North Charleston, South Carolina police officer. In a matter of seconds his footage captured Officer Michael Slager firing at Scott’s back eight times, killing him. After turning the video over to Scott’s family, Santana’s graphic footage was broadcast across the country by all major news networks. The resulting media outrage ended with Officer Slager being charged with murder. However if news outlets want to continue running the footage, Santana’s publicist claims they should now expect a $10,000 fee.
Feidin Santana, bystander who recorded Walter Scott shooting: ‘I’m still scared’ http://t.co/poD0pB3Zwi pic.twitter.com/RAiFktwrNl
— TODAY (@TODAYshow) April 9, 2015
According to the New York Times, cease-and-desist letters were sent to various news outlets around the world from Markson Sparks, a publicity and celebrity management company based in Sydney, Australia.
The dispute over whether or not Santana should be compensated for the video boils down to interpretations of “fair use” clauses, which allow news agencies to use copyrighted material for news purposes. Despite the video being unequivocally newsworthy, high-profile celebrity agent and chief executive of Markson Sparks Max Markson told Buzzfeed that news outlets are now just using it for revenue purposes, saying,
Fair usage for video exists and networks can still use it for a certain amount of time like with footage from the Olympics, but the fair usage fee is for people who want to use it again. And in the lead-up to the trial we expect there will be more requests for licensing.
Markson also reportedly told the New York Times over the phone that the fee amount would be negotiable, but another anonymous source familiar with the negotiations said news media outlets would be charged a one-time fee of $10,000.
The Times made sure to mention that it has used the video with the family’s permission and has not received a cease-and-desist letter.
Santana has been praised for his bravery in capturing and sharing the video with the public. After all, without his footage the cop may not have ever been charged with Scott’s murder. However a $10,000 licensing fee smells a little like greed. Santana does own rights to the video, making his entrepreneurial claims legit, but that still doesn’t make a licensing fee sound any better. Then again, it’s always going to be kind of unsettling when an individual attempts to profit from someone else’s death. Moreover, the media companies who received cease-and-desist letters will likely try anything to avoid handing over the cash, leaving Santana’s attempts to profit up in the air.
Comments